The proposal would have allowed countries like Japan, Norway and Iceland, who never stopped killing whales in the first place, to continue killing them, with the endorsement of the IWC.  Thanks to pressure from IDA and whale supporters worldwide, we stood firmly unified, demanding real protection from hunting for whales. The world listened. And they agreed.

Although we prevailed in maintaining the global ban on commercial whaling, other significant pressures continue to harm whales and threaten their existence.  Starvation, increasing predation by orcas, migration through industrial polluted waters, oil spills, military sonar, and commercial fishing operations are among the many obstacles threatening their survival today.  The central location of the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, for example, is home to an endangered sperm whale population. In 2009, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration indicated the population would not be able to withstand a loss of three additional whales due to man.  Last week, the first dead sperm whale was found floating 77 miles south of the sunken rig.

Please enjoy the victory – and take pride in the part you played preserving the moratorium on commercial whaling. Stay tuned for upcoming alerts to further protect marine mammals and their habitats. Next time we ask you to send a letter or fax, remember this – it can work. Every fax and e-mail you sent made this victory possible.

Tanzania and Zambia were seeking to sell more than 100 tons of ivory worth more than $20 million and to downlist elephants to a lesser degree of protection, despite charges that the countries have failed to stop poaching and combat the illegal ivory trade.

At one point, Zambia withdrew its controversial request for an ivory sale in hopes of winning the downlisting of elephants, which would have conferred them less protections and allowed live exports and a regulated trade in elephant parts – the first step toward the sale of ivory in the future. We are dismayed that the U.S. supported this revised proposal, which failed to win the required two-thirds vote.

There is a clear link between one-off ivory sales, the last of which occurred after the 2007 CITES meeting, and a serious increase in elephant poaching. Even elephants in relatively protected areas such as the Amboseli National Park in Kenya have come under serious attack. AP reports that such sales revive dormant markets by sending consumers the message that it’s okay to again buy ivory; it also makes it difficult to differentiate between legal and illegal ivory. Had the sales been granted, the ivory would have been sold to China and Japan, the only countries requesting to purchase it. Ivory is mainly used for jewelry, carvings and personal seals.

The global ivory trade threatened to wipe out Africa’s elephants in the 1970s and 1980s, reducing the continent’s population of elephants by half – from an estimated 1.3 million to fewer than 600,000 individuals – before a ban on ivory sales in 1989. Even with the ban, an estimated 38,000 African elephants are killed each year for their tusks, though the number may be as high as 60,000. Conservationists believe that, without intervention, elephants could be nearly extinct by 2020.

This victory was possible due to the efforts of the 23-nation African Elephant Coalition, which also sought a 20-year moratorium on the sale of ivory that was unfortunately rejected at the conference. Contributing invaluable scientific evidence against the proposals were Dr. Joyce Poole of ElephantVoices and the Amboseli Elephant Research Project, Iain Douglas-Hamilton of Save the Elephants, and Dr. Sam Wasser of the University of Washington, who presented compelling data detailing the problems behind the proposals, the detrimental effects of poaching on elephant society, and the DNA evidence implicating Zambia and Tanzania in multiple ivory seizures around the world.

IDA thanks everyone who contacted Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar and their elected officials, urging the U.S. to take a position against the proposals by Zambia and Tanzania.

What You Can Do TODAY Or No Later Than Tomorrow – Friday, March 13, before 5:00 pm, PST:

1) Contact the California Fish & Game Commission.  Urge the Commission to REJECT THE FISH & GAME PROPOSALS INVOLVING BLACK BEARS based on the background information below:

director@dfg.ca.gov, jcarlson@dfg.ca.gov, fgc@fgc.ca.gov

- cc your email to the Commission to the CA Dept. of Fish & Game:

Dr. Eric Loft

Chief, Department of Fish and Game

Email: eloft@dfg.ca.gov

2) Please also attend the upcoming Fish & Game Commission meeting where the CDF&G proposals to kill more bears will be discussed.
When: Thursday, April 8th at 8:30 a.m.

Where: Beach Resort Monterey, 2600 Sand Dunes Dr., Monterey, Calif.

Background Information:

In 2009, the Commission allowed 1,700 black bears to be legally killed. When 1,700 bears are reported killed, the season closes. Or if the end of season arrives and 1,700 bears haven’t been killed, the season closes anyway. The CDF&G complains that it costs too much to notify hunters of an early closure and is pushing to allow an unlimited number of black bears to be killed up until the end of the season instead. While IDA does not support the lethal removal of black bears whatsoever, CDF&G proposing to kill more bears to save money instead of updating their notification system is simply a stone-age mentality.

The CDF&G has also proposed to allow the use of GPS equipment and tree switches (they notify the hunter when and where a bear has taken refuge in a tree). They state that use of these would allow for the increased care and monitoring of dogs. This is completely absurd because if a bear was in a tree, the dogs would be safely below. In actuality, the use of GPS equipment and tree switches would assure that more bears would be killed because so long as dogs were equipped with these tracking devices and trailing bears, bears wouldn’t have a chance to ever get away.

CDF&G also wants to expand training grounds where dogs can practice on live bears.  While the bears aren’t supposed to be shot by hunters during these exercises, they would still be placed under considerable stress by either running to get away or fighting a pack of dogs who don’t adhere to all the commands yet. Opening up greater area for dogs to train translates into more space for dogs to harass and molest black bear cubs and other non-target species.

Black bear poaching is also another major concern in California. CDF&G also wants to expand the land where black bears can be legally hunted. By doing so, this welcomes poachers to greater area in which to kill bears. The legalization of GPS equipment and tree switches would also help poachers claim more bears lives and fuel the black market for their gall bladders and paws.

The use of dogs to track bears is a losing situation for many dogs as well. This should be outlawed. It is common for bears to injure and/or kill entire packs of dogs. Sows with cubs are known to be extremely dangerous and are illegal to take, yet dogs continue to pursue them. In one case, a female with three cubs fought with dogs for over 10 minutes before the hunter called his dogs off because they were getting hurt. Two weeks later, the same sow was pursued again and fought with the dogs before that hunter called them off too.  Using dogs is cruel to both bears and dogs.

For more information, please contact Melissa@idausa.org

We couldn’t buy better exposure for our campaign to stop the slaughter, consumption, and live capture of dolphins in Japan. A billion people, including media outlets around the world, are slated to tune into the event that will undoubtedly create a surge of pressure directed at the Japan Fisheries Agency to stop allowing dolphins to be slaughtered, and their mercury-laden meat to be eaten by Japanese citizens.

We are so thrilled that The Cove will be released this year in Japan, because combined with the exposure through the Oscars, the Japanese government will no longer be able hide the issues behind media blackouts.

Whether The Cove wins Best Documentary or not, this is a critical victory for getting the information to the Japanese public!

Thanks to your letters to the European Parliament concerning  the seal hunt in Canada last year, the European Union (EU) responded with a  landslide vote to prohibit the sale of seal based products.  The great  news is it goes into effective this year!  With that measure in place, we  must now continue our focus on flooding Canadian Ambassadors or High  Commissioners with letters supporting the Harb Bill, which would end the  seal hunt in Canada.  The Canadian government must continue to hear  how much we still want the seal hunt to end.  In order to help push this  bill along, we need to make a concerted effort to educate others to take  similar action as well.

We have the unique opportunity to maximize our  efforts this year as there are other significant factors helping to reduce  overall incentives for sealers to kill.  The price for pelts last year  was terrible ($14/ each) and proved to be reason enough for many sealers to  stay home.  Ice conditions were also poor and provided less than optimal  conditions necessary for sealers to run around beating seals.  Under  similar circumstances this year, if sealers are really interested in the hunt,  they will have to spend more money on fuel to travel further north in order to  find more seals and suitable conditions to slaughtering them.  On top of  those factors to consider, they also now have to contend with an EU ban on  seal products, so there aren’t going to be too many buyers for seal skins.

This year, ice conditions are reportedly lower than they  have been in decades.  While this will deter many sealers from going out  to kill animals, poor ice conditions also have a negative impact on seal  populations.  Harp seals require compacted ice in order to give birth and  nurse their young.  Without ice in their normal birthing range, seals  have to travel farther north to find suitable habitat or give birth on beaches  that can be easily accessible by man.  Others may not have time or the  physical capacity to make an extended journey and will be forced to give birth  underwater where the pups will die.

The majority of Canadians are in  favor of the seal hunt ending, as are so many others compassionate  people around the world. The Canadian government must continue to  receive pressure both from within Canada as well as the international  community if the hunt in Canada is ever to end permanently.

For  more information on how you can help, please go to:  http://www.idausa.org/marine_mammals.html

Photo Credit : Nicholas Fevelo for News - NYDailyNews.com

A deer massacre took place over two nights, January 7th and 13th, at a 530-acre farm preserve owned by Vassar College in Poughkeepsie, New York. White Buffalo, Inc., a company of “sharpshooters” hired by Vassar, slaughtered sixty-four deer.

In order to make it easier to lure the deer, they were conditioned with food over a period of several weeks. After gaining their trust, they were shot at night as they returned to the area looking for food. Use of lights, known as deer jacking, was also allowed. Deer jacking involves shining a spotlight on a deer at night, temporarily “freezing” him or her in place (think deer in the headlights), making them an easy target for hunters.

After the first night of killing when 44 deer were killed, Vassar College President Catharine Bond Hill was asked by a local grassroots organization to put an end to the slaughter. President Hill refused, and 20 more deer were killed. This was the first leg of the Vassar-lethal deer management program by which the college plans to kill a total of 85 deer, reducing the population on the preserve from 100 down to 15.

Vassar took its cue from the deer curtailment protocols of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC), which advises that shooting deer is the best method for dealing with deer population control. Vassar was granted a permit by the NYSDEC to kill a maximum of 50 deer but it was revised to allow the college to take more. Vassar claims it investigated non-lethal deer management programs, such as fencing, fertility control, and relocation but opted instead to hire the sharpshooters.

The elite college claims the kill was “humane,” but White Buffalo was exposed in 2004 for placing plastic bags over the heads of deer who were shot but still alive during a cull in Akron, OH. Undercover video footage caught by the group SHARK shows deer flailing in distress for minutes after being shot.

Vassar’s intent was to finish the kill before students and faculty returned to campus from winter break, on January 20th, thereby avoiding public notice and eliminating the chance of any protest from taking place. The school claims it held public meetings informing students and the general public about the kill, but many citizens have complained that they were not notified and had no voice in the proceedings. The student newspaper, The Miscellany News, supposedly informed the students about the kill but was overwhelmingly biased in an article published on December 9th, the day classes ended. The study period started the next day and was followed by exams and the holiday season. Considering there was so little opposition to the deer kill on campus, it seems a near certainty that students were not aware of what it was all about.

Nevertheless, a grassroots group, SaveOurDeer, was formed in response to the killing. Composed of Vassar College students and members of the local community, the group has appealed to Vassar to end the kill in favor of non-lethal measures, but the college refused to consider them. SaveOurDeer has held two protests thus far, one of which was attended by more than 60 people.

Vassar paid at least $10,000 to hire White Buffalo to kill the deer. An initial estimate of $25,000 was presented to Vassar, which it was willing to pay, but that fee was reduced to between $8,000 and $10,000 “due to a change in scope of the operation and site details,” according to Vassar’s Web site.

Our question to Vassar: why not appropriate this money toward a program of deer fertility control using immunocontraception?
As an academic institution, Vassar is in a perfect position to utilize its faculty and student resources to implement a program of deer contraception. The funds used to hire sharpshooters should instead be applied towards a non-lethal program of deer population control. It is time to stop reverting to killing because it is the easy and unthinking thing to do.

Click here to send an e-mail to Vassar College’s President to protest the deer kill.

Though California State Flag celebrates their Grizzly bears. . . California's Black bears are in real danger.

A representative from IDA made a statement before the California Fish and Game Commission Thursday in opposition to the expansion of the number of bears who can be hunted in the state of California for the 2010 season. Also in the proposal is an increase in the range of legal hunting territory in the state.

IDA and others opposed to the Commission’s proposal to expand the quota by almost double and the range of legal hunting territory testified that this is unnecessary and inhumane sport hunting. The proposal also allows the use of new technology, such as GPS and “tip switches,” for the hunting of black bears. The approval of such a regulation by the Commission would only compound the current inhumane policy of allowing dog-pack hunting of these bears.

Like millions of compassionate Californians, we at IDA are greatly concerned about the welfare of wild animals that make up this state’s cherished wildlife. We truly can’t imagine the terror these black bears must feel as they are chased up a tree and cornered by a pack of dogs and then — panicked and immobilized — are blasted out of the tree by high-powered rifles.
Managing our wildlife populations should be accomplished in ways that first-and-foremost provide for the humane treatment of the wild animals. We would like to see that the Fish and Game Commission resort to humane ways of dealing with bear overpopulation and resolving human-bear conflict. It should not be accomplished by brutal high tech killing masked as “sport hunting.”  Ultimately, it is not the bears’ fault that we have moved into their space and they should not have to pay the price by being killed with such brutality as by amateur hunters armed with packs of dogs fitted with GPS devices.
IDA will watch this proposal closely, keep our California members up to speed and speak out for the magnificent black bears.

I attended a meeting last Thursday, November 12, that was set up to explain to county residents why this slaughter is necessary. It seems we have lost biodiversity and now we must kill the deer to regain it.Here’s how it works. Once upon a time, before 1800, we lived in an idyllic landscape consisting of approximately 15 deer per square mile. Then the human species got busy, clear cutting the forests and killing predatory species like wolves and coyotes. Deer, too, were virtually wiped out by 1850.

But when all the farmers who had clear cut the lands started moving west, the forests returned. Some people decided it would be good to reintroduce the deer. So with no human or animal predators and the forests a-flourishing, the deer proliferated.

Now, however, we must kill them for decimating the forest floor, along with Mrs. Smith’s tulips. You see, even though humans have turned the entire ecosystem on its head, we are indignant that we can’t enjoy all the same plant species that were here 100 years ago. That’s where the biodiversity part comes in. Our forests don’t look like we want them to. So in order to restore biodiversity, we must kill deer to return their population to that elusive 15 per square mile (even though there is some belief that it is below this number in many areas of Westchester) and, in so doing, we will reverse all the turmoil that has resulted from our housing developments, golf courses, strip malls, and decimation of a bevy of larger species.

Some people are not buying this argument. We question how a plan for single species management can possibly offset all the other variables that have already been tampered with in the environment. One panel speaker, a representative from the Humane Society of the U.S., offered a refreshing opposition to killing deer, and pointed out that our forest floor may look different today because forests go through stages. Old growth forests have a dense canopy with little light that doesn’t permit the kind of ground cover we think we should have. In other words, the natural world we covet may in fact be more fiction than fact.

It turns out that killing deer as a management solution is not without its problems. For one thing, there is a demonstrated rebound effect whereby deer fertility will balloon in response to decline in species numbers. In a short time, we will be back where we started. That’s the thing about nature. It really was set up to keep things in order, despite human intervention.

Worse still, with an average population density of 2,134 human inhabitants per square mile, Westchester County, it turns out, is a poor choice for hunting of any sort.  Our public officials acknowledge that, yet they also quickly dismissed non-lethal forms of deer management. Can they really believe that biodiversity will return at the expense of rationality?

Westchester County is not alone. Scores of communities throughout the U.S. are dealing with the new face of suburban hunting. As human populations grow, and as deer are forced to live in increasingly limited habitat, deer-human conflicts will rise. But killing deer with guns or arrows doesn’t work in the long run, and is hardly a viable option in areas of high human population. To think that killing deer in our county parks will restore forest biodiversity is a fairy tale. We need real world solutions, and we need to develop ways to co-exist with nature in an increasingly modified world.

This is the new face of human-wildlife interactions that will only increase as we go forward. IDA’s plea is for a sane plan that respects and tolerates the natural world, including its nonhuman inhabitants. This is our challenge—indeed it is our mandate, and with the help of compassionate people everywhere, we will work to get it accomplished.